EE/Orange coverage contract?

Dr_Clare_Stubbs

Please help quickly: When I took out my new Orange/EE contract for Services I had good coverage where I lived. 14 weeks into the new Agreement my coverage became impaired or non-existent where I live, therefore I cannot access the wifi/browsing and calling part of the Agreement I signed.
EE admitted in writing that I now live on the edge of a "coverage hole", although when I signed the Agreement the coverage had been good. EE also admitted in writing that "works" had been going on at my local mast, and subsequently Orange verbally (recorded phone call to 150) confirmed that my local mast had been switched off to boost the signal from other masts.
I asked for a 50% refund from EE as I cannot use my phone for the 50% of each day I'm at home - this seemed reasonable and I can use my phone when elsewhere. EE refused to compensate me. EE's argument is that in the Agreement I signed it states that EE cannot be held responsible for 100% coverage in all locations, and cited "external factors" (i.e. they are blaming the structure of my home, the weather, a broken handset). The matter is now with CISAS and EE have submitted a defence, which I am trying to respond to.
What Laws or Statutes protect me for this scenario? The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 was written before mobile phones and I'm struggling to use it to write a convincing argument - CAN ANYONE HELP ME (I need to send my response to CISAS in THREE DAYS!!!). Thanks!

Silk

When you took out the contract it was based on the fact you were able to get a quality service signal at your primary location ie the billing address.
As that service has now been removed without promise of restoration of the signal you should request that your contract is cancelled without penalty.

Dr_Clare_Stubbs

Thank you Silk. This is useful. There might be a slight problem though, because (EE not being the most reliable network provider), their operative got my address wrong and it defaulted to my old address on their system! That issue has been rectified but I can see them using this as another excuse... Also when I asked to be released from my contract early, EE said "Sure," then wanted me to buy myself out for £349. I certainly don't recommend EE anymore.

Silk

Dr_Clare_Stubbs wrote: »

Thank you Silk. This is useful. There might be a slight problem though, because (EE not being the most reliable network provider), their operative got my address wrong and it defaulted to my old address on their system! That issue has been rectified but I can see them using this as another excuse...

It won't change things if the error has been rectified and the contract now shows your correct address ...all you would need to do is show you lived at the address when the contract was taken out and the steps taken to rectify etc

Dr_Clare_Stubbs wrote: »

Also when I asked to be released from my contract early, EE said "Sure," then wanted me to buy myself out for £349. I certainly don't recommend EE anymore.

That would be the case if they were not at fault ....however removing part of a service you had previously enjoyed and one that forms a large portion of your useage breaks the contract.
Remember that there are two parties to the contract and they are contracted to supply the same standard of service within reason.
To remove that and admit to the removal is enough to take it to the courts if push comes to shove. It stands to reason that based on the current coverage they provide to your primary location you would not take out a contract with them and would seek a provider that covers your location instead.

Dr_Clare_Stubbs

Thank you Silk (why "Silk"? Are you a barrister by any chance?)
I feel supported and reassured by your response. I hope you will not mind me paraphrasing what you've said in my written argument?
Again - many thanks for taking the time to respond to my post